MassCops - Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network, A Mass Police Web Portal

Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network

Massachusetts Police News, Information and Discussions on MassCops

Pages: 1

Main Page City targeting false alarms
(Click here to view the original thread on the MassCops Message Board)

Posted by: USMCMP5811

City targeting false alarms

BY GEORGE W. RHODES/SUN CHRONICLE STAFF

ATTLEBORO -- Red flags raised at the last city council meeting sparked changes in a proposed ordinance aimed at reducing false burglar alarms and bolstering police protection.

Signs that the ordinance was in trouble popped up during a public hearing, when city councilors and residents loudly protested a biennial $10 alarm registration fee.
They also objected to a `` no response'' clause that would permit police to ignore an alarm after seven false alarms from the same property in a year.

As a result, City Council public safety Chair woman Kim Allard drafted changes that will insti tute a one-time $25 registration fee, and would eliminate the `` no response'' clause.

Alarm holders still would be required to register every two years, she said.

The `` no response'' clause will be replaced with a fine of $200 for the seventh false alarm and each additional false alarm.
`` I think these changes will address the con cerns from the other night,'' Allard said.

Allard had originally planned a vote on the measure at last week's meeting.

She authored the ordinance, which is strongly backed by police, who say thousands of false alarms a year unnecessarily take cops off the streets and waste their time.

A vote could come on April 18.

Police Chief Richard Pierce pushed hard for the ordinance.

It would impose fines on property owners if they have more than three false alarms in a year.

The minimum fine is $50 for four false alarms. The fines escalate per incident until they reach $200.

The law also would require registration of alarm owners and alarm companies.

Under the ordinance, businesses would have to pay $100 per year for registration.

Property owners also would have to identify `` key holders'' who could respond to their property in 25 minutes or less.

The city would ask property owners to detail property layouts on alarm registration forms.

Forms would ask if the property owner has dog or if there are any obstacles, such as pools, in the yard. That information would alert police to hazards if they're trying to find their way in the dark.

Pierce said there were 2,458 false alarms in 2005, almost seven a day. A police officer can be tied up for as little as a few minutes or as long as an hour at a false alarm.

`` It's a burden and drain on our resources,'' Pierce told councilors. `` I think it's time we address the issue of repeated false alarms.''

Public safety Vice Chairman George Ross wants the law to have a slightly different focus.

`` I would rather have an ordinance that targets multiple offenders, rather than just taxing everyone,'' he said. `` It seems like we're feeing ourselves to death.''

Councilor Frank Cook also took issue with the fees.

`` I don't think it's fair to impose unnecessary financial burdens,'' he said.

Posted by: Delta784

We charge $25 per false alarm, after 4 in a calender year.

Posted by: LA Copper

We charge around $80 after the second false alarm.

Posted by: Clouseau

Three free, after that it's $100.00 a pop. It drastically cut down the false alarms from when we charged $25.00. Now they are much more careful and have there systems upgraded and repaired since the increase. They are sorry to see us the 4th time. Some have even told us that we shouldn't have came. Nothing like hitting them where it counts.

LA, I thought LAPD wouldn't respond anymore unless an owner/operator or security company actually verified a break? I remember reading this somewhere. The city council and the alarm companies were strongly opposing this change, until the council realized the millions of dollars wasted chasing false alarms?

Posted by: RPD931

I remember reading that Boston PD was looking at eliminating alarm response altogether.

Posted by: mtc

Quote:

Originally Posted by RPD931

I remember reading that Boston PD was looking at eliminating alarm response altogether.

I think that must have gone through - I know a liquor store manager that has to respond ALONE to the store, if the alarm goes off. No matter what time of night, Boston PD doesn't respond - even to escort him.

He takes his wife as a 'lookout' and communicate via Nextel.

Posted by: LA Copper

The media is very misleading, to say the least. They did make it sound like we weren't going to respond at all, you're right. In actuality, we used to respond to three alarms at the same place in one year before the city started to charge.

Then Bratton realized that we were responding to thousands of alarms a year that were about 97% false and suggested that we only respond to an alarm once before not going at all. That of course didn't fly with the public, which in turn didn't fly with the city council so they came to a compromise... two alarms before they start charging but still respond.

Posted by: Killjoy

Quote:

Nice...and I'm sure the city of Boston has issued him a LTC...or did they deny it, like they deny to practically everyone...

Posted by: dcs2244

Boston...the "Pyongyang of America"...

Posted by: bstrawse

LA ended up not doing this but Bratton has continued to push the issue.

Dallas, Salt Lake City, and 4-5 other cities now have an "alarm verification" requirement that requires that an actual break-in or other crime be verified before police are dispatched. I expect that approach to become more and more common in the months ahead.

ma police, boston ma police, massachusetts police, massachusetts police, mass state police, mass police, ma, mass, massachusetts, massachusetts, massachutes, massachusetts law, massachusetts polece, police, officer, police officer, cops, police gear, law enforcement, police duty gear, state police, sheriff, law, police supply, police agency directory, police agency, police department, traffic officer, police dept, state trooper, dispatcher, massachusetts county sheriff, massachusetts sheriff, massachusetts department of corrections, ma doc, doc, dept of corrections, police information, civil service, ma civil service, massachusetts crime, police training, police academy, ma police academy, massachusetts officers, masscop, masscops, mpa, bpa, ibpoa, police association, massachusetts police news, massachusetts crime news, mass most wanted, police career information, police patrol, police administration, police books, crime scene training, police discussion, crime discussions, cops

About MassCops, the home for Massachusetts law enforcement.

The Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network opened in 1998 and is now a part of the New England Police Network The site is a pro-police discussion forum intended for sworn police officers and civilian law enforcement officials as well as those interested in pursuing a career in law enforcement here in Massachusetts.

The goal of The Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network is to provide an informal network of law enforcement officials here in Massachusetts for educational and informational purposes.

The forum covers many topics such as Police Related News Articles, Agency & Profession Discussions, Police Training as well as Law Enforcement Career Information.

The Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network and The New England Police Network (NEPN) and it's network sites are privately owned websites/domains and are not affiliated with or endorsed by any government association or agency.

MassCops (masscops.com) and (masscop.com) are privately owned are not affiliated with or endorsed by the Massachusetts Coalition of Police (masscop.org)

3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 49 50 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108